MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1579122361 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2005.1556042

Learning nonlinear constraints with contrastive backpropagation

2006· article· en· W1579122361 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings. 2005 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, 2005. · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackpropagationIndependence (probability theory)Computer scienceRepresentation (politics)Nonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkMachine learningEnergy (signal processing)AlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Certain datasets can be efficiently modelled in terms of constraints that are usually satisfied but sometimes are strongly violated. We propose using energy-based density models (EBMs) implementing products of frequently approximately satisfied nonlinear constraints for modelling such datasets. We demonstrate the feasibility of this approach by training an EBM using contrastive backpropagation on a dataset of idealized trajectories of two balls bouncing in a box and showing that the model learns an accurate and efficient representation of the dataset, taking advantage of the approximate independence between subsets of variables.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it